Jane Hamsher Has NO SHAME!

This from Booman…

The Obama Derangement Syndrome has reached Stage Four when Jane Hamsher blames the president for not supporting Blanche Lincoln sufficiently.

…Lincoln’s vote for his health care bill cost her dearly, and without Specter’s vote for the stimulus, it never would have happened.Now I don’t feel the least bit sorry for either of them, but it doesn’t say anything good about Obama that he would abandon them in the clinch like that either.

The story is supposed to be that the president hates liberals and loves conservadems like Blanche Lincoln and Arlen Specter. But, when that story doesn’t quite add up, the story shifts to ‘the president doesn’t stick up for his friends’. If you try hard enough, you can criticize the president for taking a crap. If you can read that piece and find a Democrat-supporting author, you have more familiarity than I do with the crack pipe.

You absolutely have to love Booman.

Hamsher, Greenwald & Uygur…You Are NOT The Base!

I’ve been in the base of the Democratic Party since I was 10 years old, handing out leaflets and putting stamps on envelopes for George McGovern’s campaign in 1972. I’ve donated many hundreds of dollars over the years and volunteered my time to elect Democratic candidates, I’ve only voted for one Republican in my life and that was because I knew him personally and he was a moderate, decent guy. In the 38 years of being in the base, I know what the base looks like. Hamsher, Greenwald and Uygur…I’ve served with the base, I know the base, the base are friends of mine, firebaggers, you are not the base.

The base of the Democratic party in all seriousness are unions, African Americans, Hispanics, women, younger voters and college educated folks. Here is a great breakdown of who voted in 2008. By definition, the base are your most loyal voters. The ones who always turn out for your party, the ones who work for you, support you and can be counted on. Does that describe the people who are claiming to be or represent the base? I don’t think so.

The definition of “The Base” of the party has been conveniently redefined by those in the blogosphere who are really out for a quick buck, and who are attempting to snatch and wield power by threatening candidates with challengers and by raising money for specific candidates who they feel they can control. I had to laugh when the “professional left” comment came from Robert Gibbs and many of these bloggers ran to jump in front of that bullet. They claimed that title so fast, my head spun. And what exactly did Robert Gibbs say that they were all so incensed about. “I hear these people saying he’s like George Bush. Those people ought to be drug tested,” Gibbs said. “I mean, it’s crazy.” The way I interpreted there outrage over that comment was that they were admitting that they think Obama is like Bush, which is just plain fucking crazy and Robert Gibbs was dead on by saying they need to be drug tested. If you were offended by his comment, you deserved to be and let me tell you, YOU ARE NOT THE BASE OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. If you were the base, you would not even entertain the notion that President Obama is like George Bush, it wouldn’t even cross your mind. Go look at this site and tell me this president is like George Bush.

I personally feel like the party I have been loyal to since the time I had an opinion about politics has been hijacked by opportunists. You might notice that they have to keep telling people, mostly the compliant media, that they are the base. They have taken the Republican tactic of repeat, repeat, repeat and used it for their own ends. And I’m pointing fingers squarely at the worst offenders, Jane Hamsher and Arianna Huffington. They both have built networks that raise money for “non-profits” and targeted PAC’s for the candidates of their choosing. They both prey on public outrage and anger, purposely misleading readers with headlines, purposely giving selective information to rile up their followers and often blatantly lying and mischaracterizing facts to bolster their twisted views. They have been playing people on the left for years and getting away with it.

I am here to tell you that “The Base” is alive and well and supporting this president. Even with the worst economy since the great depression, according to a recent Quinnipiac Poll, the President gets an 81 – 12 percent approval rating from Democrats. On the Afghanistan War, the issue the firebaggers love to throw at him and say is so unpopular…well, “Despite increased casualties, American voters say 58 – 33 percent that eliminating the threat of terrorists operating from Afghanistan is a goal for which American troops should fight and possibly die”. Sure, some numbers in the poll aren’t very good, and like I said above, considering the state of the economy, this president has some pretty strong support. What I might call, “The Base”.

Jane Hamsher Continues To Lie About Health Reform – A Pattern!

I really try to avoid anything Jane Hamsher writes, says or does. She has become a sad person who has let her hatred overwhelm what common sense and intelligence she had, which upon looking back at her really wasn’t much to begin with. She is very much like Arianna Huffington in that they both have made careers out of playing on people’s populist outrage, whether it is at George W. Bush…they both launched careers out of attacking the guy with the biggest target on his back or now with the economy in the dumps, inherited by the Obama administration, they are both playing into that anger. It isn’t much different than how so many made money off the 9/11 tragedy. So I click on a link at Booman’s Tribune and end up at a Jane Hamsher post. I start reading her snarky post titled “Axelrod Stabs Rahm, Runs From Wreckage of Health Care Bill” and of course, didn’t get very far before coming across a blatant lie. Here is what I came on…

But it’s also clear that the race is on to unload responsibility for the extremely unpopular health care bill.  And Axelrod wants to make sure he doesn’t get the blame:

“Extrememly unpopular” health care bill…..really, maybe in the circle of bloggers that you have surrounded yourself with, but in the general public, let’s look at some numbers. From The Hill, August 3rd

a new survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation shows opposition dropping to 35 percent from 41 percent in the last month, and 50 percent of the public had a favorable view of the law, up from 48 percent. Support and opposition tend to be partisan, but the trendline is certainly heading in the Democrats’ direction.

Now wait a minute, I thought Janey said it is “extremely unpopular” and of course Axelrod is running from the wreckage of….a bill that has a 50 favorable and a 35 unfavorable. This is a perfect example of Ole’ Janey preaching to the choir that gather at her blog. She likes to continue feeding the hungry haters at her site with the raw meat they like, whether it is true or not. When I do lose my mind and click over to her blog, I usually get hit right up side the head with a blatant falsehood, outright lie and certainly a lot of negative spin on anything the Obama administration has on its plate. She has become a joke, resorting to the same tactics as the Tea Party folks who she has reached her hand out to on a few occasions. Remember how Ole’ Janey found time to go on Fox News, join hands with Grover Norquist and go skipping off into the horizon. She continues to marginalize herself and there is no coming back from it, she will fade away into the background, screaming out “it should have been Hillary, it should have been Hillary, it should have been Hilla…….”. [Fade to black]

Let’s Demagogue The Deficit Commission Now, What A Great Plan!

Presidents have been creating commissions since the beginning of our Republic, it’s become a cliché’ over the years whenever a difficult decision has to be made or some horrible disaster needs to be investigated or a president wants to dodge an issue. So any commission starts out handicapped for sure. I usually react by shaking my head and saying “not another one” when I hear about the latest commission, whether it be a R or D president doing it. I reacted much the same way when President Obama created the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. Now just because I shake my head when these things are created, doesn’t mean that I don’t think they can produce results that might be of use or help to clarify things. I also never waste my time tracking a commission because it is an exercise in futility for a couple of reasons. First, because during the process, the sources of information are usually pushing their own agenda and feed the starving “media beast” what they are promoting and try to scare people about what others are promoting. Second, a commission simply produces a report that the President and Congress sometimes agree with and other times doesn’t, and it really has nothing more than a minor role in the whole process of making laws and governing. So why should I waste my time watching the bouncing balls when the report might end up being ignored anyways. A little background on commissions…

Historically, commissions have enjoyed a colorful chronology. In 1794, farmers in western Pennsylvania revolted against the federal excise tax on spirits. Faced with the Whisky Rebellion, President George Washington sent a commission to investigate the situation and attempt to mediate a settlement.

Now there is a good reason for a commission, whisky. (sarcasm) If you are curious to know more about the history of commissions, check out this article I found on the History News Network. If you are into that sort of thing, that is.

Alan Simpson’s comments have caused all sorts of propaganda to spew forth. He’s an asshole and has been one for many years, he masks his “asshole-ness” by trying to crack jokes and be a fucking stand up comedian. I think Alan Simpson should be fired from the commission for his comments. He has a long history of saying stupid shit and really shouldn’t be taken seriously by anyone. Having said that, after reading some posts by liberals about how they think that the deficit commission is really a front for cutting social security and from what I can tell, it centers around Alan Simpson for the most part. I started looking into the deficit commission because to be honest, I haven’t tracked it much. I found stuff like this…

As the news site AlterNet reports, President Obama has stacked his new 18-member committee charged with dealing with the deficit, the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, with a number of figures who have staked their careers on undermining Social Security.

So “President Obama has stacked his new 18-member commission”, really. I went to the executive order that created the commission and learned that this is how the 18 members were selected.

(a) six members appointed by the President, not more than four of whom shall be from the same political party;
(b) three members selected by the Majority Leader of the Senate, all of whom shall be current Members of the Senate;
(c) three members selected by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, all of whom shall be current Members of the House of Representatives;
(d) three members selected by the Minority Leader of the Senate, all of whom shall be current Members of the Senate; and
(e) three members selected by the Minority Leader of the House of Representatives, all of whom shall be current Members of the House of Representatives.

Ut oh, the truth is the president didn’t “stack” anything, he appointed 6 members of the commission, 4 of them democrats. It looks like they set up the commission to include both parties and both houses of congress. Sounds pretty bi-partisan to me which probably pisses off those firebaggers who demonize anyone who doesn’t think exactly like them or doesn’t hate Obama. We are Obamabots, you know, or apologists.

Consistent with the Obama-haters other overreactions and made up controversies, they seem to have planted a virus in their heads that makes them think that the deficit commission is really the “eliminate Social Security commission.” They’ve even come up with a cute term for it ” the cat food commission”, aren’t they soooo clever. The main source of that virus appears to be Alan Simpson’s participation in the commission and they seem to have elevated him to being the only member of the commission and Social Security is the only topic. It’s so much easier to distort things to match your narrative than it is to actually deal in reality. It’s sooooo Republican of them. Besides the above “stacking” distortion, let’s look at some of the others…

Nobody really thought Alan Simpson could top his video appearance with Alex Lawson where he talked about “the lesser people” on Social Security.  But once again, President Obama’s hand-picked Co-Chair of the Catfood Commission tasked with “tweaking” Social Security has proven us all wrong.

That’s from the one and only queen of hate, Jane Hamsher and notice how Alan Simpson is “tasked with ‘tweaking’ SS”. Really, that’s his job on the commission, huh? Very subtle and typical of Hamsher’s tactics. Somehow, she’s assigned roles to certain people on the commission and if you look at the title of her post, which I won’t link to…no fucking way…you see what her goal is in her snarky, misleading bullshit post. “Obama Appointed Deficit Commission Co-Chair Alan Simpson: Social Security Is Like “A Milk Cow With 310 Million Tits”. Man, she had to work her ass off to get all that propaganda right in the title of her post. She just had to make a direct connection between Alan Simpson’s comments and President Obama. Nothing too subtle there, I guess. From what I can tell the whole basis for the virus in their brains is that people have said that Social Security is on the table. That’s it, it’s on the table.

President Obama is not stupid, unlike many of his critics. There is no way in hell that he is going to mess with Social Security, people who are saying he will are out of their fucking minds. The most he would possibly do is minor tweaks and probably to make it better. He is a progressive, whether the haters will ever believe it or not. That’s where the demagoguing comes in. These haters are preying on people’s emotions with a completely made up idea, sounds a lot like a “death panel” technique to me. You wonder why I have such disdain for those people? They are getting their panties all in a bunch about something that hasn’t happened and never will happen, but that clearly is not their goal with the latest attack.

I found this great post about some of the distortions coming out in this Alan Simpson inspired “propaganda-fest”. From William Greider at the Nation via Michael Moore’s site…(emphasis mine)

…Social Security, as Nation writers have explained many times, does not contribute a penny to federal deficits and it never will, according to the terms of the law. The opposite is the case.

On the same page the Times reported Simpson’s latest gaffe, political reporter Matt Bai contributed a far more outrageous falsehood of his own. In condescending style, he dismissed opponents to Social Security cuts (dimwits like me) as stuck-in-the -past liberals, trying to defend big government against harsh reality. Bai celebrated the courage of Rep. Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, a Democrat who evidently embraces the same view. Bai did not mention the people and public opinion overwhelmingly opposed to benefit cuts (check the polls if you doubt this). Someone should ask Congressman Blumenauer’s constituents how they feel about his brave stance.

Bai’s great falsification was to insinuate that the Social Security’s trust fund is bogus–that the massive surpluses collected from working people to pay for their future retirements are meaningless. Social Security, he acknowledged, has amassed a pile of Treasury bonds–IOU’s from the government–but he says as a practical matter that money can’t be paid back because taxes would have to be raised or more funds borrowed elsewhere. “This is sort of like saying that you’re rich because your friend has promised to give you 10 million bucks just as soon as he wins the lottery,” Bai explains.

His comparison is a clever but consequential lie, consisted with the elite propaganda. Bai makes it sound like the government is going to give this money to retirees. In fact, it’s the other way around. Social Security collected this money from workers as their involuntary savings, better known as FICA deductions. Then the federal government borrowed the money from us and spent it on other things. Congress raised the FICA deductions 25 years ago on all working people to pay for the baby boom generation’s coming retirements. The Social Security trust fund has since built up massive surpluses–$2.5 tillion now and growing to $4.2 trillion in 2023–and set it aside for the future. But, starting with Ronald Reagan, the federal government ran massive deficits on its own budgets and borrowed the savings from Social Security to pay for wars and military build-ups, regressive tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, among other things.

This vast wealth belongs to the working people who paid it–not to the federal government or Congress. Naturally, many politicians would like to get out of paying it back, but that constitutes a massive bait-and-switch swindle of working people. Bai and many other reporters of the mainstream media have been assured by their sources it is impossible to pay back that money, but that is a political choice, not a fiscal requirement. It would make working people pay for Republican gravy that went to someone else.

It is to weaken him, hurt him and in the process they are hurting the entire progressive agenda. What really pisses me off is that if they succeed in damaging Obama, like it appears they are, the result is going to be Republicans in charge. And if we thought we were fucked with the Bush administration, just wait till the new Republican Party takes over. It will take the concept of “fucked” to a whole new level. And I’m going to be in those motherfuckers faces reminding them that they are responsible for it.

President Obama Is A Man Of His Word – Combat Operations Are Over In Iraq – As Promised!

I went back in the Google archives and found this story from the Guardian about the speech President Obama gave at Fort Lejeune in February of 2009, where he spelled out his plan in Iraq. Last night that promise was fulfilled on schedule and exactly as he laid out. Eat it, critics. Here is a reminder of what was said in that speech, from the Guardian piece…

Obama flew from Washington yesterday morning to Fort Lejeune, North Carolina, to deliver his speech in front of 8,000 marines. He told them it was going to be a speech with far-reaching consequences: “Today, I have come to speak to you about how the war in Iraq will end.”

Of the 142,000 US troops in Iraq, between 92,000 and 107,000 are to leave by August next year. The mission at that point will change, from combat to one that deals primarily with training Iraqi forces, supporting the Iraqi government and engaging in counter-terrorism.

So of course I remember how much skepticism there was from people in the “professional left” or as I like to call them “the Obama-haters”, so I did a little googling to find out what these folks were saying back then. Think how they are talking about Afghanistan now….do you see any similarities and will these assholes admit that they were wrong, yea right…

According to Ricks, military brass and foreign policy officials express deep skepticism toward Obama’s withdrawal timeline and “[m]any of those closest to the situation in Iraq expect a full-blown civil war to break out there in the coming years.”

“The quiet consensus emerging… is that U.S. soldiers will probably be engaged in combat there until at least 2015 – which would put us at about the midpoint of the conflict now.” In a summary of his book, Ricks concludes: “[T]he events for which the Iraq war will be remembered probably haven’t even happened yet.” (Washington Post, 2/15/09)

Here is some more skepticism from back when the president announced his plan, I wonder how many people are listening to these people and their predictions about Afghanistan today?

Iraq’s Parliamentary elections have not yet been scheduled and don’t even have an electoral law, and according to a number of senior Iraqi politicians probably will not be held until March 2010 (not December 2009). That would then give the U.S. about five months to withdraw the bulk of the dozen combat brigades which would reportedly remain. And then, keep in mind that U.S. officials generally agree (correctly) that the most dangerous period of elections is actually in their aftermath, when disgruntled losers might turn to violence or other destabilizing measures. So the following month will likely not seem a good time either. So that would leave four months to move, what — 9 brigades? Did someone say precipitous? Good luck with that.

Some people are just in denial about it, which shouldn’t be a surprise considering there is a lot of that going around amongst the Obama-haters. Here is a piece from the one and only Obama-hater Glenn Greenwald from October of 2009…

Beyond Afghanistan, Obama continues to preside over another war — in Iraq:  remember that? — where no meaningful withdrawal has occurred.

Oh, and another from Glenn Greenwald further down in that post, emphasis is mine…

It’s certainly true that Obama inherited, not started, these conflicts.  And it’s possible that he could bring about their end, along with an overall change in how America interacts with the world in terms of actions, not just words.  If he does that, he would deserve immense credit — perhaps even a Nobel Peace Prize.  But he hasn’t done any of that.  And it’s at least as possible that he’ll do the opposite: that he’ll continue to escalate the 8-year occupation of Afghanistan, preside over more conflict in Iraq, end up in a dangerous confrontation with Iran, and continue to preserve many of the core Bush/Cheney Terrorism policies that created such a stain on America’s image and character around the world.

Where is the credit for fulfilling his promise to get combat troops out of Iraq? Hmmmmm, nothing on Glenn’s blog about the Iraq withdrawal at all, nada, nothing. Surprised? Not me. While that small but very vocal minority of Obama-haters keep chattering on, our awesome President keeps doing what he said he would do and delivering on his promises. Washington pundits don’t know how to act when someone actually does what they say and doesn’t let the media push them around with poll results. Keep it up, “Prez”, you’re doing an excellent job.



“The Professional Left” Deserves Robert Gibbs Smackdown! (Updated)

Robert Gibbs made a clarification of his comments that were reported by The Hill where he, heaven forbid, criticized some people he referred to as the “professional left”. Sam Stein said The Fuckington Post received a statement from Robert Gibbs and prints it with all his snarkiness surrounding it. I won’t link to that piece of shit rag, but I will copy and paste from it…

In a statement to the Huffington Post, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs acknowledged that his recent broadside against the “professional left” was inartful, and called for renewed unity among the Democratic community.

Referring to statements he made in an interview with The Hill published Tuesday, Gibbs reiterated his belief (which served as the basis of his initial remarks) that the president had achieved a host of legislative accomplishments for which he was not getting proper credit. But he said that Democrats, “me included,” need to “stop fighting each other and arguing about our differences on certain policies, and instead work together to make sure everyone knows what is at stake because we’ve come too far to turn back now.”

Robert, don’t take it back, those assholes like Jane Hamsher, Glenn Greenwald, Cenk Uygur and the rest of the “Firebagger Brigade” don’t ever want to work with President Obama. Just like the asshole Republicans, don’t reach your hand out to those PINO’s “progressive in name only”. They and their rabid followers have an irrational hatred for President Obama, I get their troll comments all the time. Their goal is to help bring down President Obama to “prove” that Hillary or Dennis Kucinich should have been president. I think it just pisses them off more when the president accomplishes something. Nicole473 commented at Bob Cesca’s place that brings this home to me…

These Firebaggers are nuts, IMO.

This fact was brought home to me recently when I posted about a new website. A Firebagger went berserk over it in the comments. A Firebagger whom I know from Twitter, and who seems to be a very reasonable human when not discussing Obama.

There is a hatred that I think started during the election when Hillary and Barack were at the peak of their battle. I had many friends who were very angry and bitter that Obama was beating her, they became irrational. Thankfully most of them came down after the heat of the battle, but some who have the power of the pen like Hamsher, never did. They have clung to this irrational hatred and are still fighting Hillary’s lost battle. Was that Jane Hamsher dodging sniper fire with Hillary on that runway in Bosnia? Back to the Fuckington Post piece…Sam Stein makes a bold statement “The vast majority of the reaction, however, was sharply negative.” He then quotes the one and only Janey Hamsher…

“Spiro Agnew — sorry, Robert Gibbs — says “the professional left is not representative of the progressives who organized, campaigned, raised money and ultimately voted for Obama” emailed Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake.com. ” Well, the Obama in the White House is not the Obama who organized, campaigned, raised money and ran for office, so I guess its’ a wash.”

How clever, Jane. Is that like a twist on words that you thought up all by yourself. Wow, I wish I were that clever. Jane Hamsher does not represent very many people on the left…if you go to her site and read the comments, which can lower your IQ so be careful, but if you read her commenters, not very many are progressive. They use the exact same talking points as Fox News. Firebaglake does not represent the progressives. There may be a few sane people there who are progressive but most of them are with the hate Obama crowd and consumed with an irrational hatred for President Obama. I don’t want to call them racist, but man, that irrational hatred they have smells very much like the same stench that comes from racism.

Update Courtesy of Staci…

Via John Cole over at Ballon Juice:

Here’s a better question for you all. Name one time the “professional left” has had the administration’s back on… anything.
Since the inauguration, it has nothing but attacking from the left, calling them failures, adding to the cacophony of outrage to the right, all while pretending they were moving the overton window. We’ve heard calls for every administration member’s head, from the left, since day one. All the while, the same folks pretend to be the base (they weren’t- the ones I have in mind were in large part Hillary supporters) and babble about the Overton Window.
Christ- Ed Schultz and the usual poutrage crew spent the last five months of HCR trying to kill it dead, with Ed switching at the last moment when it was clear it would pass. If you were Robert Gibbs, you’d tell these people to shut the fuck up, too.

Exactly!

Dead on, thanks Staci……

Never Enough For The Haters!

The Aweseome Bob Cesca found this comment on Balloon Juice that I have to share with you. It sums up a lot of my feelings towards those on the left who seem to want to cut off their noses to spite their face. I have to wonder if they really long for the days of Bush when they could make a cottage industry out of bitching and whining. Bush certainly gave them a lot to bitch about and folks like Jane Hamsher an Cenk Uygur have made a career out of bitching. Without a big target like Bush, they are turning their guns on the current administration and undermining the principles they claim to be fighting for. From Bob’s post from a commenter on Balloon Juice…

I think the frustration that supporters of the president have (at least it is for me) is that his critics give him credit for nothing. NOTHING.He gets a health care reform bill passed that is sweeping in scope and more than anyone has done in decades. And the left-wing critics say “Not enough.”

He gets a stimulus bill passed that pretty much kept a massive recession from getting worse and all the left-wing critics said was “Not enough.”

He’s on the verge of getting DADT repealed through law as opposed to using a reversible executive order and all the left-wing critics say is “Not enough.”

He gives a speech that talks about peak oil, points out how government corruption played a role and begins to lay out the way forward towards an alternative energy future and all the left-wing critics say is “Not enough” while having orgasms to Rachael Maddow’s satisfying-but-completely unrealistic “Fake President” speech.

Never mind Lily Leadbetter, killing the F-22 (something BUSH couldn’t do), expanding SCHIP, credit card reform, tobacco regulation…but no, it’s not enough. It’s NEVER enough with some people.

There is legit criticism to be made when it comes to President Obama, especially in the civil rights arena. But to hear the WATBs on the left tell it, he hasn’t done a damn thing. And that is simply not true.

Bob sums up the craziness with this…

And this kind of thing achieves… what? Hipster cred? Probably. But I assure you, taking down this president and his supporters with exclusively critical screeds every day will not elect more liberals. Certainly not more liberal presidents. If a Republican is elected next time around, even the most centrist policies of this administration will be rolled back and destroyed within the first 100 days. Guaranteed.

But at least some of these firebaggers and PUMAs have vented their self-defeating rage.

Lite blogging this weekend, traveling to Chicago for a premiere of my latest documentary. We’re going in style, so it should be fun. I’ll be checking in via iPhone, so don’t make me type my thumb off you trolls out there.  :)

Jane Hamsher Loses Again!

I have to confess that even though I’m not a fan of Blanche Lincoln and wish she were more liberal, I was happy to see her beat Jane Hamsher and her gang of thugs. And even though Jane is progressive on many of the same issues I am, her tactics and attitude completely turn me off and I won’t personally give her any clicks, unless I’m writing about her and doing research. Here is a blast from the past where Jane started her attack against another democrat and says “I dare Blanche Lincoln to join a filibuster….”

She’s so tough, loves to threaten people who don’t believe the way she does and has no qualms about attacking democrats. Watch the clip and notice the look in her eyes, the revenge, the hatred and the sense that she has soooo much power that you better not cross her. Turns out that even with unions helping her, she couldn’t help pull it out in Arkansas, and I’m sorry, but Jane owns this loss after the above statement on Rachel’s show. Now I said above that I wish Blanche Lincoln were more liberal but over the years I’ve come to the realization that the Democratic Party is a big tent and the reason we are the best political party is because we welcome people of all races, beliefs, sexual orientation and people with diverse views. Now Jane seems to want to exclude people, push away people that don’t pass her purity test, run liberals in areas where a liberal can’t possibly win and weaken the president that has the best chance of passing a progressive agenda since…..well, the Johnson administration. She is a disease within the on the “progressive” movement and needs to be shunned.

I went over to her website, which I won’t link to, and read her excuse/positive spin – lame ass attempt to justify taking all that money from her mindless followers. It was pretty pathetic, which she kind of admits with her update linking to Greg Sargent, who spins the same thing.

The polls were wrong, they all showed Blanche Lincoln losing. Whaaaaaa, I thought polls were always right, that they should dictate public policy because they are always so accurate. Spit!